About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
and the republicans in congress balanced the budget, but that's because the economy was growing in 1990s. i was there, i know it. it was balance -way before anybody expected it to be balanced. there is nothing that is particularly important about balancing the budget. it sounds good, but you don't really want the budget to be balanced if you have a lot of people who are unemployed or under utilize examines city. there's no reason to balance the budgets on the backs of the poor and if it means sacrificing investments in education job training, research and development, infrastructure. those are investments in future growth, the future of our country. we don't want to reduce those investments for the sake of some totem which is called balanced budgets. >> you pointed out to the gop leadership is held hostage by the tea party. when john boehner said we don't have a long term debt problem in this country it seemed he and president obama agreed to tone down the rhetoric to calm people a a bit. were you encouraged by that statement? >> i am encouraged in the sense that there is not a long term debt problem
$85 billion of spending and as many as three-quarters of a million jobs out of the economy this year. we've gotten used to republican leaders insisting the national debt is the nation's number one priority. but that might be so last week. here is congressman paul ryan on "face the nation" this sunday. >> we do not have a debt crisis right now, but we see it coming. we know it's irrefutably happening. if we follow the president's lead or if we pass the senate budget then we will have a debt crisis then everybody gets hurts. you know who gets hurt first the poor and the elderly. that's what we're trying to prevent from happening. >> john: preventing a debt crisis to help the poor and elderly. that sounds like a really good idea. could speaker of the house john boehner agree with congressman ryan on this? >> we do not have an immediate debt crisis, but we all know that we have one looming. it could be a year, two years three years four years. it's not an immediate problem. >> john: how about canceling the sequester mr. speaker. while the national debt may not be an immediate problem sur
the retail economy. that is false there? >> well, there are a couple of things false there. first of all there is no payroll tax hike. what happened on january first was that the payroll tax rate was restored to what it was two or three years ago. let's not forget what we're bound to forget at one point or another that we reduced the payroll tax on employees by 2 percentage points as a way of producing relief in these economic hard times for americans. so it was really an economic relief program not a cut in social security tax. and i think what is it really at work here is that critics of social security are the enemies of social security want to paint the program as though it's too expensive for america to sustain. that's really--that is really a lie because in fact social security benefits in this country are far--they're paul trypaltrycompared to what other countries have. >> cenk: that leads to lie number two entitlement benefits for millionaires and billionaires is a huge problem. >> the underlying motive of this lie is to turn social security and medicare into mean sets of program
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)